Franklin

Yes, that was another point I picked up on from a post on the CN forum. UHC-S? What does the S mean? Is it that the filter allows more of the total spectrum through? More than a conventional UHC.  So if that is the case the Baader UHC-S might be not too different from the Skyglow I already have. What do you think of the Explore Scientific range of filters? They do a 2" UHC. Would that be like the Baader UHC-S or tradtional UHC? There's so many filters out there, I'm confused.

That's a second vote on the UHC then. Thanks Victor.

Hi John, thanks for the reply. I've been reading a lot of your input on this site, very knowledgeable. Yes UHC that's what I was thinking too. I have a Baader Neodymiun Moon & Skyglow which does help with contrast on solar system objects but I'm looking for a filter for deepsky viewing now. My scope is no light bucket, 127mm f9.4 achro, so I think the narrowband O-III and others might be lost on it. Which is why I'm after a general purpose "nebula filter". My mind was all but made up on the Baader UHC and then I read on some of the sales sites how the CLS will perform on a greater number of deepsky targets. Hence my confusion. Anyway, from the posts I've been reading on here you seem like you're one of the resident guru's so I will side with your advice, especially since you have experience with refractors. Baader UHC it is.

Hi, I'm new on here and have a question to ask. If you could only choose one filter, just for visual use from a suburban site with an average scope, to help with light pollution and increase contrast on the greatest number of different celestial objects, which one would it be? CLS or UHC. Which one is the best all-rounder?

A classic moon book! I pestered my mum to get me a copy of Moon, Mars & Venus for my 10th birthday back in 1978, it's still on my shelf today. A very useful and very well made book. Lost the dustcover at some point along the way but now have it in a plastic sleeve. This and S&T Pocket Sky Atlas are my  only scope companions.